There are some good argements for using tolling for "new" or added highway capacity. Would you pay ten dollars on I-5 between 99 and 680 if they added two lanes in each direction? Imagine your automated vehicle cruising on auto pilot passing all of those ag trucks doing fifty, instead of suck in an eight mile back up while ag trucks pass each other on the grades???? What about the same deal from Yermo to Las Vegas where you crawl along on a Friday night at an "average speed" way below what Brightline's will be?

And, imagine the trucks actually paying tolls for all of that damage they do to I-5, directly, like railroads have to,,,,

And, I will also note, that there are some of these road pricing schemes that are "theoretically" more "efficient" but have awful costs and cost shifting, as well as serious mobility impacts for the other 70-90% of middle and lower income road users.

And, it has nothing to do with trains, but does have something to do with how we fund the transportation systems we use.

JMann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> errrr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OR is not IL. IL does have toll roads. OR
> (except
> > for a few bridges) does not.
> >
> > CA does have toll roads, toll lanes, and toll
> > bridges. But the primary road system is not
> > tolled. Still, that has no relevance for toll
> road
> > issues in OR.
> >
> > In FL, if it's not an Interstate, a rural state
> > highway, or a local street, it's probably a
> toll
> > road. That's roughly the opposite extreme from
> > OR.
>
> That was my point. The video shows Oregon as
> being a state with toll roads. It doesn't have
> them.